Reviews
Doubt
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | John Patrick Shanley |
| Written by: | John Patrick Shanley |
| Starring: | Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams, Viola Davis, Joseph Foster, Mike Roukis |
| Released: | January 15, 2009 |
| Grade: | A- |
"Doubt is a bond as powerful as certainty." These words are uttered by Father Brendan Flynn (Hoffman) during one of his weekly’s sermons. He speaks to those who doubt their ability, their judgement or even their own faith. Father Flynn’s intent is to comfort his parishioners. They should not feel alone when they experience doubt. It is a natural human condition and the best medicine is to confide in the people we trust most.
Fathers Flynn’s sermon sets the stage for this aptly titled film. The man behind it all is John Patrick Shanley, the Academy Award winning writer of Moonstruck. It started out as a play which debuted in New York in 2004. It went on to win four Tony Awards in 2005 and has since been performed around the globe (including here in Australia).
The story has attracted the attention of some powerful people in Hollywood and it comes as no surprise to see it adapted into a movie. It features two of the finest actors in Hollywood – Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep. Instead of choosing a more high-profile director, the studio has taken a gamble and allowed Shanley to both write and direct this cinematic adaptation. His only previous credit was the less than memorable Joe Versus The Volcano in 1990.
For the most part, those behind the production have come through with the goods. This is a quality drama with some outstanding performances. Several cast members are in line for Academy Award nominations when they are revealed next week.
The film is set in 1964 within a small Catholic school in New York. Sister Aloysius Beauvier (Streep) is the school’s headmasters and she rules with an iron fist. All the students are afraid of her and she is quick to punish any minor indiscretion. Father Flynn doesn’t quite see eye to eye with Sister Aloysius. He sees that the times are changing and believes the Catholic Church present a more welcoming image. Kids shouldn’t have to live in fear in of them.
These two people are about to face off. One of the young teachers, Sister James (Adams) has become a little concerned about Father Flynn’s relationship with a boy named Donald Miller (Foster). She noted that when Donald returned to class after meeting with Father Flynn, he seemed troubled. She could also smell alcohol on his breath. She reported to the matter to Sister Aloysius who immediately jumps to the conclusion that something is amiss.
Has Sister Aloysius been too hasty with her judgement? Is she wrong to trust her gut instinct, especially given the gravity of the situation? Father Flynn provides an explanation for the events but can he be trusted? With little physical evidence to go on, Sister Aloysius does her utmost to get Father Flynn to confess. Who is right and who is wrong?
The only issue I have with the film is that there are a few unnecessary subplots and characters. We are introduced to some of the students at the start but nothing seems to come of them. Maybe they’re meant to be red herrings. It still bugged me though.
There’s a lot of dialogue in this film and the best parts are the confrontations between Hoffman and Streep. They do exactly what the screenplay asks of them – they create doubt in the mind of the audience. If you see this film with friends, you might enjoy comparing thoughts afterwards. Who did you believe?
The Wrestler
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | Darren Aronofsky |
| Written by: | Robert D. Siegel |
| Starring: | Mickey Rourke, Marisa Tomei, Evan Rachel Wood, Mark Margolis, Todd Barry, Wass Stevens |
| Released: | January 15, 2009 |
| Grade: | A+ |
It’s been a disappointing Oscar season so far. I’ve seen a lot of good films but I haven’t seen one that wanted to make me stand up and cheer. That is, until now. The Wrestler is a near-perfect movie. If it’s not the best film of 2009, it’ll be damn close.
Randy "The Ram" Robinson (Rourke) is a semi-retired wrestler. Back in the 1980s, he was one of the biggest celebrities in the business. He had everything he wanted – wealth, popularity and success. His most famous bout was against an adversary known appropriately as "The Ayatollah". Their fight at Madison Square Garden is still talked about today.
The world has since moved on… and Randy hasn’t been a part of it. He now works at a crummy looking supermarket and what little income he has is spent on booze and hookers. He doesn’t even have enough to pay the rent. Randy still gets an occasional gig on the amateur wrestling circuit but it’s a far cry from the lofty heights that he once achieved. The crowds are small and his pay cheque is even smaller.
There’s a great scene which sums up the crux of the movie. Randy and a group of other wrestling "has beens" have an exhibition night where fans can come and meet them. They set up their stands and have photographs and VHS tapes ready to sell. Only a handful of people turn up. It was at this point when I truly felt sorry for these guys. Sure, they’re not saints, but they’ve been chewed up and spat out by the system that operates in the world of professional sport. When you’re hot, everyone wants to be with you. When you’re not, no one could care less.
Mickey Rourke’s performance as Randy is the best by an actor in the past year. I’ll be gutted if he doesn’t win the Oscar next month. He is as tough as nails and he throws himself around with unwavering determination. What impressed me more was the "softer side" of the role. Rourke beautifully portrays Randy as a guy who puts on a brave face but deep down, is sad and lonely. He’s such a rich, complex character.
There are two relationships which are explored in the film. The first is with an ageing stripper named Cassidy (Tomei). The pair have always been close and Randy wants to take their friendship a step further but Cassidy is reluctant to do so. She has a strict rule not to get involved with clients. The second relationship is with his estranged daughter, Stephanie (Wood). Randy knows that he’s let Stephanie down over the years and he’d like to make amends.
Director Darren Aranofsky has now made two amazing films. The first was Requiem For A Dream and it was my favourite film of 2001. He slipped up in 2006 with The Fountain but has now returned to full form. The style of The Wrestler is little unusual but incredibly effective. It’s a mix between documentary and drama. It feels like we’re intrusively peering into the lives of real people.
When you break it down, this is a movie about a broken man trying to find a purpose for his life. The story of "The Ram" is one that I won’t easily forget.
Twilight
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | Catherine Hardwicke |
| Written by: | Melissa Rosenberg |
| Starring: | Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Billy Burke, Ashley Greene, Peter Facinelli, Cam Gigandet |
| Released: | December 11, 2008 |
| Grade: | B+ |
Twilight will fulfil the dreams of all teenage girls who have wanted to be swept off their feet by a stalking, blood-thirsty vampire. I didn’t realise anyone had such a desire until I saw the box-office numbers. It will be one of the most profitable movies of 2008.
That said, the high demand for tickets hasn’t been driven by a whizz-bang marketing campaign or through positive word of mouth. The cult-like following for the story started several years ago when author Stephenie Meyer wrote the novel on which the film is based. I’ve never read Twilight (or the three follow-up books) but it seems that many young people have. It’s the new Harry Potter.
I have to admit that like the concept. Bella Swan (Stewart) is a teenage girl who has moved to a small town in Washington to live with her father. Her appearance creates quite a buzz at her school and she quickly makes new friends. There is one person though that she wants to know more about. He has good looks, pale skin and a mysterious aura. His name is Edward Cullen (Pattinson).
It’s obvious to everyone that there’s an immediately attraction between the pair. They can’t keep their eyes off each other. Edward is standoffish however. He shows an interest in Bella but then warns her to keep away. What’s his deal?
Bella soon realises the answer. Edward and his family are closeted vampires. They don’t kill people though – they have learned to restrain their strong thirst and live off the blood of animals instead. It’s not as fulfilling as human blood but it’s a sacrifice they have made so as to fit in with society. The worrying thing for Edward is that he has incredibly strong feelings for Bella. There’s a chance he could lose control and his true vampire instincts would take over…
We’ve seen so many different vampire movies over the years but this story does have a freshness to it. There are many who believe that there’s an underlying religious subtext revolving around abstinence and self-control. I can see where their coming from but I’m not going to delve too deeply on this issue in this review. You can debate that one with your friends.
What I will comment on is the great “look” of the film. The credit must go to director Catherine Hardwicke (Thirteen) and cinematographer Elliot Davis (Out Of Sight). They have created a cool fantasy world which is both gloomy and unsettling. I also liked the many facial close-ups. You can tell a lot about what each character is thinking simply from the look in their eyes.
There are some limitations to the story. I thought the rushed ending was the weakest part of the movie. I expected a little more drama. Perhaps we’ll see more action in the sequel, New Moon, which is already in pre-production. Like many others, I’m looking forward to it.
The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | David Fincher |
| Written by: | Eric Roth, Robin Swicord |
| Starring: | Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Tilda Swinton, Julia Ormond, Taraji P. Henson, Jason Flemyng |
| Released: | December 26, 2008 |
| Grade: | B |
The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button is close to 3 hours in length but the plot is surprisingly easy to summarise. It’s the life story of a person who ages in reverse. His name is Benjamin Button and when born, he had the appearance of a tiny, wrinkly old man. The doctors didn’t give him long to live. As time passed though, Benjamin started to look better and better.
The film follows the ups and downs of his life and the people he meets along the way. We see him raised by his adopted mother after being left on her doorstep. We follow his father who tries to maintain an interest in Benjamin’s life without revealing his true identity. We watch him discover love for the first time after meeting an Englishwoman in a Russian sea port.
There’s one character however who plays a bigger part in Benjamin’s life than all the others. Her name is Daisy. They first met when Daisy was a child and their lives have continued to cross the same paths ever since. There’s an obvious connection between them but destiny keeps finding ways to keep them apart.
That’s all I’m prepared to reveal at this point. If you’re interesting in seeing the film, you can go along and watch Benjamin’s journey unfold. We’ll all have our own opinion but I admit to being disappointed. I was expecting a greater emotional impact. The way the characters spoke and interacted left me feeling “cold”. The only exception was Benjamin’s mother, Queenie (played by Taraji P. Henson). You could sense the love and concern that she had for her adopted son.
The running theme throughout the movie is one of ageing and death. Benjamin has to watch all of his friends grow older and die. The film will strike a cord with some audiences but I wasn’t particularly moved by this theme (which was reinforced again and again). The other major problem is that there’s no suspense. You always know where the story is heading and to have to wait so long for the inevitable conclusion was frustrating at times. Could certain subplots have been cut to greatly shorten the film’s length? Also, what was the point of the Hurricane Katrina stuff in the current day scenes?
Qualms aside, I do want to praise the quality of the production. The work performed by the make-up artists and visual effects teams is amazing. There are scenes where Brad Pitt looks 20 and there are scenes where he looks 80. I don’t know how they did it. The cinematography from Claudio Miranda and the music score from Alexandre Desplat (The Queen) also deserve a mention. It’s not his best film but I think it’s gutsy for director David Fincher (Fight Club, Zodiac) to tackle such challenging material.
Likely to earn a bunch of Academy Award nominations early next year, I don’t know what the general movie going public is going to make of Benjamin Button. It certainly has “star power” with the likes of Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett but if they share a similar reaction to myself, they’re likely to walk out of the theatre feeling unfulfilled.
Slumdog Millionaire
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | Danny Boyle |
| Written by: | Simon Beaufoy |
| Starring: | Dev Patel, Anil Kapoor, Saurabh Shukla, Freida Pinto, Irfan Khan, Madhur Mittal |
| Released: | December 18, 2008 |
| Grade: | A- |
When Slumdog Millionaire screened at the 2008 Toronto Film Festival, it received a standing ovation. It came as no surprise when it won the People’s Choice Award for best movie. Given that Toronto is the biggest film festival in the world, this is a huge honour. Previous winners at Toronto have included Hotel Rwanda, Whale Rider, Amelie and American Beauty. Most Oscar bloggers have declared Slumdog as a “shoe in” for a best picture nomination at next year’s Academy Awards.
As I sit at my computer, I’m telling myself to trust my gut instinct. Don’t bow to public pressure. I have to be honest and say that while I enjoyed the film, I found it overrated. It reminds me of the thoughts I had for the much loved Little Miss Sunshine two years ago. I was certainly in the minority by declaring it “good but not great.”
When Slumdog Millionaire begins, we see teenager Jamal Malik (Patel) sitting in the “hot seat” on the Indian equivalent of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? He has just won 10 million rupees which is about $300,000 in Australian dollars. When he returns tomorrow night, he will tackle the final question and try to double that total.
The game show host, Prem Kumar (Kapoor), thinks that Jamal has been cheating. He can’t understand how a homeless kid from the slums of India could manage to know so much information. He wants Jamal exposed as a fraud and so he gets the local police involved. They forcibly take Jamal back to the police station and try to beat the information out of him.
The head Police Inspector (Khan) soon realises that Jamal is no con artist. When grilled about each question, we go on a flashback to find the part of Jamal’s life where he first learned the answer. There are some nice memories and some not-so-nice memories.
This makes up the crux of the movie and I like this method of storytelling. Instead of focusing on Jamal’s success on the show, we reflect back and find out what made him the person he is today. Simon Beaufoy’s (The Full Monty) screenplay touches on some of the social and economic problems within India. We also discover that the reason Jamal is on the show is to impress a girl. Her name is Latika (Pinto) and despite knowing each other for a long time, they seemed destined to be apart.
I don’t know how to say this but the reason that I didn’t love this film (as others will) was because it felt a little weird. The current day Jamal is dull and despite all the flashbacks, I never really understood him. How did he have such strong feelings for Latika? I struggled to see the connection between them. I also wanted to know more about his young life – particularly the darker chapters. Certain events, such as his mother’s death, are not explored. I also took issue to the fate of Jamal’s brother and the way it is handled.
Now that I’ve vented my frustrations, I should finish on a positive given that this is still a film worth seeing. I liked the Indian backdrop and especially the work of cinematographer Anthony Mantle (28 Days Later, The Last King Of Scotland). I thought Anil Kapoor gave the best performance as the Who Wants To Be A Millionaire host. You’re never quite sure of his intentions and if there’s one thing I won’t forget about this movie, it’s the way he pronounces the word “millionaire.”
My thumbs are up for Slumdog Millionaire but unlike the audience at Toronto, I won’t be giving it a standing ovation.
Yes Man
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
| Directed by: | Peyton Reed |
| Written by: | Nicholas Stoller, Jarrad Paul, Andrew Mogel |
| Starring: | Jim Carrey, Zooey Deschanel, Bradley Cooper, John Michael Higgins, Terence Stamp |
| Released: | January 1, 2009 |
| Grade: | C+ |
When your mobile phone rings and the display says "caller unknown", do you answer it? That is the first dilemma that we see Carl Allen (Carrey) face in Yes Man. He chooses to reject the call and puts the phone back in his pocket. He doesn’t want to talk to anyone – friends or otherwise. He’d rather rent a movie from the video store and watch it alone at home.
You’ll quickly learn that Carl’s answer to everything is "no". When a friend asks him out for drinks to celebrate an important event, he says no. When his boss asks him to a fancy dress social club function, he says no. When a guy on the street tries to hand him a flyer for an upcoming music event, he definitely says no. Considering his disposition, Carl has an ideal job. He works at a bank and assesses loan application. Suffice to say that this is one bank that won’t have had any problems with the recent "sub prime" loan crisis. Carl rejects almost everything.
He wasn’t always this way. His negative attitude evolved after his wife left him a few years ago. She has since moved on and found a new man. His world will soon change when he meets an old work colleague and is given a pamphlet to a self-help seminar. The key speaker is Terrence Bundley (Stamp) and he preaches the importance of living life and saying "yes" to all new things. Carl is naturally sceptical but after Terrence singles him out for attention, he decides to take a risk and try it out.
His actions are transferred into instant success. He learns to speak Korean, he learns to play the guitar and most importantly, he meets a new girl. Her name is Allison (Deschanel) and she leads a peculiar group of people who go jogging and take photos at the same time. It’s all come together for Carl but he will soon learn that it’s impossible to say "yes" to everything and choices will have to be made…
I like the premise for this film. It is based on the biography written by Englishman Danny Wallace in 2005. It left me thinking about my own life and whether saying "yes", when I would have otherwise said "no", could have left me with more interesting memories and experiences. It’s a topic worth debating. If everyone took a piece out of Carl’s book, would the world be a more exciting place?
Unfortunately, this cinematic adaptation of Wallace’s novel is let down by a weak screenplay and a mediocre performance from Jim Carrey. The script seems to get worse as the film progresses. It officially loses the plot during a scene where Carl is arrested on suspicion of being involved in terrorist activities. Surely this film could have been funny without having to resort to such absurd plot developments?
I was once a very big fan of Jim Carrey thanks to his performances in films such as Man On The Moon and The Truman Show. He’s just going through the motions here with his stock-standard facial expressions and incomprehensible words. We’ve seen all this from him before. Some will notice the parallels with Liar Liar which was also about a guy who did the opposite (speak the truth) as opposed to doing what he wanted to do (lie).
There are a handful of funny sequences and I’m sure the film will be a smash hit at the box-office thanks to the lure of Jim Carrey and a strong marketing campaign. Best of luck with it.